agentleFS
Sign inStart free
IcodeNetIcodeNet/agent-skills/skills/architecture/SKILL.md

architecture

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Facilitates design decisions and trade-off records. Use when choosing between approaches, designing a module or seam, asking "should we use X", or needing an architecture decision before coding. Do not use for bug fixes, broad tech-debt scans, or greenfield system design from a blank slate.

136 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use intelligent-routing, bash-linux and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • SKB3002Skill

    intelligent-routing

    Automatic agent selection and intelligent task routing. Analyzes user requests and automatically selects the best specialist agent(s) without requiring explicit user mentions.

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • xenitV1Skill

    bash-linux

    Bash/Linux terminal patterns. Critical commands, piping, error handling, scripting. Use when working on macOS or Linux systems.

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • xenitV1Skill

    red-team-tactics

    Red team tactics principles based on MITRE ATT&CK. Attack phases, detection evasion, reporting.

    Also in 8 projects that use this

  • SKB3002Skill

    nextjs-react-expert

    React and Next.js performance optimization from Vercel Engineering. Use when building React components, optimizing performance, eliminating waterfalls, reducing bundle size, reviewing code for performance issues, or implementing server/client-side optimizations.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +8 more from xenitV1

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 118 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Do not change user-visible behavior under the guise of “architecture” unless the goal is a behavior change.

    line 31
  2. Distinctive:

    Keep PRs ticket-scoped: architecture work not required for the ticket goes elsewhere.

    line 32

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 118 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Architecture

Decide deliberately. Record the why. Prefer deepening existing seams over new layers.

Related skills

  • Broad codebase deepening / tech-debt scan → tech-debt or improve-codebase-architecture
  • Greenfield service / API / data model → system-design
  • Domain grilling with living docs → grill-with-docs

Workflow

  1. Frame the decision — one-sentence problem; hard constraints (time, security, multi-tenant, platforms).
  2. Read existing truth — architecture docs, ADRs, prior decisions. Do not re-litigate without new evidence.
  3. List 2–3 options — each with fit, complexity, testability, reversibility.
  4. Pick and justify — prefer deep modules (small interface, large behavior) and explicit seams.
  5. Record — short decision note or ADR. See references/adr-template.md for formal ADRs.
  6. Hand off — implementation tasks must be independently verifiable; no speculative abstractions.

Constraints

  • Do not change user-visible behavior under the guise of “architecture” unless the goal is a behavior change.
  • Keep PRs ticket-scoped: architecture work not required for the ticket goes elsewhere.
  • Extend canonical modules; do not duplicate contracts or shared helpers.

Verification

  • Problem and constraints stated
  • ≥2 options considered with trade-offs
  • Decision recorded (PR note or ADR)
  • Next implementation tasks are independently verifiable

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

Check your setup, free